We’re Tracking the Future of Security

Category: Physical Security

  • Executive and Dignitary Protection Technology: GPS, Panic Alerts and Travel Risk Intelligence

    Executive and Dignitary Protection Technology: GPS, Panic Alerts and Travel Risk Intelligence

    Executive protection has historically relied on trained personnel: close protection officers, advance teams and drivers who assess a principal’s environment in real time. Technology has not replaced that human judgment, but it has meaningfully extended what a protection team can see and how quickly it can respond, particularly for organizations that need to protect executives, board members or high-profile individuals across frequent, often international, travel.

    Location awareness is the foundational layer. Modern executive protection programs typically issue principals a discreet tracking device, or rely on a mobile application with background location services, that reports position to a monitoring center on a continuous or interval basis. The technical trade-off is between battery life and update frequency: continuous high-frequency GPS reporting drains battery quickly and can be detected by device-scanning tools, while longer reporting intervals conserve power but reduce situational awareness during a fast-moving incident. Many programs address this by combining a low-frequency background trace with an on-demand “check-in” or panic function that triggers high-frequency reporting the moment it is activated.

    Panic and duress alerting has moved well beyond a single button. Contemporary systems support silent activation methods, including a specific sequence of button presses on a smartphone, a wearable device with a discreet trigger, or voice-activated duress phrases that can be spoken into a phone call without alerting a nearby threat actor that an alert has been raised. When triggered, these systems typically push the principal’s live location, a pre-recorded audio or video stream if available, and relevant medical and emergency contact information simultaneously to a monitoring center, local protection team members, and in some deployments directly to a pre-coordinated local emergency response contact.

    Travel risk intelligence is the layer that operates before a trip begins rather than during an incident. Dedicated travel risk management platforms aggregate data from government travel advisories, regional threat intelligence feeds, health and disease surveillance sources, and civil unrest monitoring services, then map that data against a principal’s planned itinerary to flag elevated-risk destinations, routes or dates. Advance teams use this intelligence to adjust routing, lodging selection and local security staffing, and increasingly to pre-position emergency evacuation plans and medical assistance contracts specific to the destination.

    Communication redundancy is a design principle that runs through all of these systems. A protection program that depends entirely on a principal’s personal smartphone and cellular connectivity has a single point of failure in exactly the scenarios, such as civil unrest or infrastructure disruption, where reliable communication matters most. Mature programs layer satellite communication devices, encrypted messaging applications that can operate over degraded connectivity, and pre-briefed rally points and communication windows that do not depend on any single technology working correctly.

    Integration with corporate security operations centers is increasingly common for organizations with dedicated executive protection functions, allowing a principal’s location and duress status to appear alongside broader corporate security monitoring rather than in an isolated protection-team-only system. This integration raises the same governance questions found in other converged security programs: who has visibility into an executive’s real-time location, how long location history is retained, and what separation exists between legitimate protective monitoring and inappropriate surveillance of a senior executive’s personal movements.

  • Banking and Financial Institution Security Technology

    Banking and Financial Institution Security Technology

    Financial institutions protect a mix of physical assets, sensitive data and public-facing customer environments, which means bank security spans branch design, vault protection, ATM networks and increasingly the cybersecurity of connected physical-security devices themselves.

    Branch video surveillance

    Branch camera systems cover teller lines, entrances, vaults and parking areas, supporting both robbery response and everyday operational and liability needs. Many institutions pair cameras with silent alarm capability at teller stations so staff can signal a robbery without alerting the person committing it.

    Vault and safe-deposit protection

    Vaults and safe-deposit areas typically combine reinforced construction with time-delay locks, dual-custody procedures and dedicated alarm and access-control zones. These measures are designed to resist both external attack and unauthorized access by an individual employee acting alone, reflecting the dual-custody principle common in financial-security design.

    ATM and self-service security

    ATMs and self-service kiosks operate outside normal branch hours and in some cases outside the branch itself, which creates distinct risks including physical attacks on the machine, card-skimming devices and network-based fraud. Financial institutions typically combine physical hardening, camera coverage, skimmer-detection technology and transaction monitoring to address these different attack types.

    Access control for staff and cash-handling areas

    Access control governs movement between public branch space and restricted areas such as cash rooms, IT closets and back-office operations. Role-based permissions and detailed audit trails support both security and the compliance requirements that apply to financial institutions in most jurisdictions.

    Cyber-physical convergence

    Modern branch security systems, including cameras, access controllers and alarm panels, are networked devices connected to the same infrastructure as core banking systems. That makes cybersecurity hygiene, including network segmentation, credential management and patching, a core part of physical-security design rather than a separate concern, particularly given how attractive financial institutions are as targets.

    Risk varies by institution type and location

    A large urban branch, a rural branch and a data center or operations facility carry different risk profiles, and security programs at most institutions are tailored accordingly rather than using a single standard branch design everywhere.

    Conclusion

    Banking and financial-institution security depends on a combination of branch video and alarm systems, vault and ATM-specific protections, disciplined access control, and cybersecurity practices applied to the physical-security network itself, reflecting the dual role of financial institutions as both cash-handling and data-handling environments.

  • Prison and Correctional Facility Security Technology

    Prison and Correctional Facility Security Technology

    Correctional facilities operate under security requirements that differ from almost any other building type: the population inside is confined rather than free to leave, staff safety and inmate safety must both be protected, and a security failure can have immediate, serious consequences.

    Perimeter detection

    Correctional perimeters typically combine physical barriers such as double fencing, razor wire and clear zones with electronic detection, including fence-mounted sensors, buried cable systems, microwave or radar detection, and camera coverage. Layered detection is intended to give staff advance warning of an escape attempt or unauthorized approach before a physical breach occurs.

    Video surveillance across a closed environment

    Comprehensive camera coverage of housing units, corridors, yards, visitation areas and perimeter zones supports both incident investigation and day-to-day supervision. Because correctional facilities operate continuously, video systems are typically designed for extended retention and rapid search, since incidents may not be reported or discovered until well after they occur.

    Access control and movement management

    Correctional access control governs not just entry to the facility but internal movement between housing units, program areas and secure zones. Interlocking door systems, sally ports and centrally controlled locking are common design features intended to prevent an inmate or unauthorized individual from moving freely between security zones.

    Contraband and weapons detection

    Screening technology at entry points, including walkthrough and handheld metal detectors, body scanners and mail-screening systems, is used to reduce the introduction of weapons, drugs and unauthorized devices such as cell phones. Contraband detection is an ongoing operational challenge for correctional agencies, and facilities generally combine technology with staff search procedures rather than relying on any single method.

    Duress alarms and staff safety

    Personal duress alarms that allow staff to summon help discreetly, combined with fixed panic buttons in high-risk areas, are a standard feature of correctional security design. Rapid, reliable location information is particularly important in a correctional setting given the potential for an incident to escalate quickly.

    Command and control integration

    Correctional security operations centers typically integrate video, access control, intercom and alarm systems into a single monitoring environment, allowing control-room staff to observe and respond across the facility rather than managing separate systems independently.

    Conclusion

    Correctional facility security depends on layered perimeter detection, comprehensive video coverage, tightly controlled internal movement, contraband screening and reliable staff duress capability, integrated through a command-and-control environment built for continuous, high-consequence operation.

  • Stadium and Large-Venue Security: Screening, Crowd Monitoring and Command Coordination

    Stadium and Large-Venue Security: Screening, Crowd Monitoring and Command Coordination

    Stadiums and large public venues concentrate tens of thousands of people, media, vendors and staff into a fixed footprint for a defined window of time. That combination of scale, timing and public exposure makes venue security a distinct discipline from everyday facility protection.

    Perimeter screening at scale

    Entry screening for a major event has to process large crowds quickly without creating dangerous queuing at the perimeter itself. Many venues now combine walkthrough magnetometers or AI-assisted weapons-detection lanes with bag policies and staffed pat-downs, tuning the mix of technology and staffing to the expected attendance and threat level of a given event.

    Video surveillance and crowd-density monitoring

    Venue-wide camera networks support both security monitoring and operational needs such as identifying overcrowding at concourses, exits or transit points. Crowd-density analytics can alert operators when a specific area approaches capacity, which supports both security response and general life-safety planning for evacuation.

    Access control for restricted areas

    Beyond the general admission perimeter, stadiums manage layered access to locker rooms, broadcast areas, VIP suites, loading docks and back-of-house corridors. Credentialing systems for staff, media and vendors typically combine badges with access-control integration so that movement through restricted zones is logged and can be reviewed after an incident.

    Counter-drone and airspace awareness

    Unauthorized drone activity over stadiums during events has become a more frequent operational concern, and some major venues have added counter-UAS detection capability to identify unauthorized aircraft near the venue during events, coordinating with local aviation and law-enforcement authorities on any mitigation response, since counter-drone mitigation options are tightly regulated in most jurisdictions.

    Unified command and multi-agency coordination

    Large events typically involve venue security, local police, fire and emergency medical services operating from a shared or closely coordinated command structure. A unified command center that brings together video feeds, access-control status, radio communications and public-address control lets these agencies share situational awareness in real time rather than working from separate information sources.

    Planning around specific event risk

    Security planning for a venue is not static: a regular-season game, a championship event and a concert with a different audience profile can carry different risk considerations. Venue operators generally adjust staffing, screening intensity and technology configuration event by event rather than applying a single fixed posture year-round.

    Conclusion

    Stadium and large-venue security depends on technology that can operate at crowd scale, from rapid screening to crowd-density analytics to counter-drone awareness, integrated through a command structure that allows venue security and public-safety agencies to act on the same information together.

  • School and Campus Security Technology: Access, Detection and Communication

    School and Campus Security Technology: Access, Detection and Communication

    Schools and college campuses share a difficult security profile: they must stay open and welcoming to students, staff, families and visitors, while protecting large populations across buildings that were often not designed with modern security requirements in mind.

    Layered access control

    Many K-12 campuses now control building entry with electronic locks, visitor check-in systems and single-point-of-entry designs during the school day, while allowing classrooms to be locked from inside in an emergency. University campuses typically layer broader perimeter and building access around more open pedestrian environments, since restricting movement across an entire campus is rarely practical.

    Visitor management

    Digital visitor-management systems that screen visitors against watchlists, print time-limited badges and log entry and exit have become standard in many districts, replacing paper sign-in sheets. These systems give administrators a real-time record of who is on site, which matters both for day-to-day safety and for emergency accountability.

    Weapons detection and screening

    Some districts and universities have introduced weapons-detection systems at building entrances, ranging from traditional metal detectors to newer AI-assisted scanning designed to move larger volumes of students through checkpoints with less friction than manual bag checks. Adoption varies widely by district and budget, and the technology is generally deployed as one layer among several rather than a standalone solution.

    Video surveillance and analytics

    Camera coverage of entrances, hallways, parking areas and building perimeters supports both incident response and day-to-day safety and discipline needs. Some systems add analytics for tasks such as detecting a propped-open door or unusual after-hours activity, which can be more useful on large, multi-building campuses than continuous human monitoring alone.

    Mass notification and emergency communication

    Rapid, campus-wide communication is central to school security planning. Mass-notification systems typically combine PA announcements, text and email alerts, and integration with local law enforcement, and many districts now tie lockdown procedures to a single trigger that activates locks, notifications and camera views simultaneously.

    Balancing security and learning environment

    Security leaders in education generally caution against measures that make schools feel like fortified facilities, since that can affect student wellbeing without necessarily improving safety outcomes. Physical security investments are typically paired with threat-assessment programs, staff training and clear procedures, which education-security researchers describe as at least as important as the technology itself.

    Conclusion

    Effective school and campus security combines layered access control, visitor management, appropriate detection technology, video coverage and fast communication, implemented in a way that fits the culture and openness required of a learning environment rather than working against it.

  • Retail Loss Prevention Technology: Cameras, EAS and AI in 2026

    Retail Loss Prevention Technology: Cameras, EAS and AI in 2026

    Retail security has to solve two problems at once: reduce theft and operational loss, and keep stores welcoming to paying customers. That balance shapes almost every technology decision in the sector.

    Shrink is more than shoplifting

    Retailers typically group loss into external theft, internal theft, process failures such as pricing or receiving errors, and vendor fraud. Because the causes differ, effective loss-prevention programs combine several tools rather than relying on a single system, and they measure results against the specific type of loss they are meant to address.

    Video analytics and exception-based reporting

    Modern video management systems can flag specific patterns for review, such as high-value transactions without a matching item scan, repeated returns, or unusual dwell time near high-shrink categories. Exception-based reporting narrows a large volume of camera footage down to the clips most likely to matter, which is essential in stores with dozens of cameras and limited loss-prevention staff.

    Electronic article surveillance and RFID

    Electronic article surveillance (EAS) tags and gates remain a baseline deterrent at store exits. Item-level RFID adds a further layer by giving retailers near real-time visibility into inventory location, which supports both loss prevention and out-of-stock reduction. The two technologies are increasingly deployed together rather than as alternatives.

    Point-of-sale integration

    Connecting video to point-of-sale and self-checkout transaction data lets a system correlate what a camera captured with what was actually rung up. This is particularly relevant for self-checkout, where scan-avoidance and mis-scanning account for a meaningful share of shrink at many retailers, and where store layout and camera placement affect how well a system can verify a transaction.

    Access control and back-of-house protection

    Loss prevention extends beyond the sales floor. Receiving docks, stockrooms and cash offices benefit from access control, audit trails and camera coverage focused on internal theft and vendor-fraud risks, which studies consistently identify as a significant share of total retail shrink.

    Balancing security with customer experience

    Overly visible or intrusive security measures can affect how customers perceive a store. Retailers increasingly favor systems that operate quietly in the background, use data to focus staff attention where it is most useful, and avoid treating every shopper as a suspect.

    Conclusion

    Retail loss-prevention technology works best as a layered, data-driven program rather than a single device. The strongest deployments combine video analytics, EAS or RFID, point-of-sale integration and access control, and they measure outcomes against the specific categories of loss each layer is designed to reduce.

  • Johnson Controls Metasys Building Automation Platform Patches Persistent XSS Vulnerability

    Johnson Controls Metasys Building Automation Platform Patches Persistent XSS Vulnerability

    Crafted URL Can Hijack Administrator Sessions

    CISA published ICS advisory ICSA-26-225-14 on August 13, 2026, disclosing a cross-site scripting vulnerability in Johnson Controls Metasys, a building automation and management platform used across critical manufacturing, commercial facilities, government facilities, transportation systems and energy sites worldwide. Tracked as CVE-2026-34491 and rated CWE-79, the flaw carries a CVSS v3 base score of 8.0.

    According to CISA, a low-privilege user can inject a malicious payload into the Metasys web interface through a crafted URL. The payload persists across logins and executes in the browser context of other users who view the affected page, including administrators, which could lead to session hijacking and unauthorized access to building systems. The advisory lists Metasys 12 and 13 as affected in all versions, and Metasys 14 before v14.1.5 and Metasys 15 before v15.0.1.

    Mitigation

    Johnson Controls has released patched versions for the affected Metasys 14 and 15 branches and published mitigation guidance for the platform. CISA recommends operators apply the available updates, restrict Metasys web interface access to trusted networks, and follow standard input-validation and session-management hardening for building management system deployments.

    Sources

  • Denver Police to Let ShotSpotter Gunshot-Detection Contract Expire After a Decade

    Denver Police to Let ShotSpotter Gunshot-Detection Contract Expire After a Decade

    City Will Phase Out Acoustic Sensors by Year’s End

    The Denver Police Department says it will let its contract for ShotSpotter gunshot-detection technology expire at the end of 2026, ending more than a decade of automated gunfire alerting in the city, according to CBS Colorado and Denver7 reporting on the department’s August 20-21, 2026 announcement. The system uses acoustic sensors mounted on utility poles to detect the sound of gunfire and alert Denver’s 911 dispatch center, often before a human caller reports a shooting. Denverite reported the city’s contract with SoundThinking, the company behind ShotSpotter, is worth roughly $4.7 million and expires at the close of the year.

    Rather than an abrupt shutdown, DPD says it will begin removing sensors from areas generating the fewest alerts first, with most of the network remaining active through the rest of 2026. According to Denver7, the department said it is evaluating “whether a new vendor can provide greater public safety benefits” and plans to launch a bidding process to assess alternative gunshot-detection capabilities while gathering community input on how to reallocate resources. As part of the initial ramp-down, DPD said it will begin phasing out ShotSpotter coverage specifically in the Sun Valley and Park Hill neighborhoods.

    A Decade of Data on Alerts, Arrests and Recovered Firearms

    In its release announcing the change, the department said that from 2020 through June 2026 the program generated 25,217 alerts, leading to 655 arrests and the recovery of 721 firearms, according to CBS Colorado. Officers also located shell-casing evidence tied to 6,672 of those alerts. Denver’s decision comes amid what Denver7 described as broader nationwide scrutiny of police gunshot-detection and surveillance technology, as cities weigh the systems’ operational value against their cost and questions about alert accuracy and community impact that have been raised in other jurisdictions.

    What Happens Next

    City officials have not yet named a preferred replacement vendor or detailed the criteria for the planned bidding process. The wind-down gives Denver several months to evaluate alternative gunshot-detection platforms and to solicit public feedback before the current sensor network is fully retired, according to the reporting from Denver7 and Denverite.

    Sources

  • Denver International Airport Logged Six Perimeter Fence Breaches in Three Years, Records Show

    Denver International Airport Logged Six Perimeter Fence Breaches in Three Years, Records Show

    A Pattern of Breaches Preceding a Fatal Incident

    Denver police have responded to six cases of people breaching the perimeter fence at Denver International Airport since January 2023, according to police records reported by The Denver Post on August 17, 2026. The most serious was a fatal incident on May 8, 2026, when 41-year-old Michael Mott scaled the airport’s eight-foot, barbed-wire-topped security fence and walked onto a runway shortly before 11:20 p.m. He was struck and killed by a Frontier Airlines aircraft that was accelerating for takeoff. Denver’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Sterling McLaren, ruled Mott’s death a suicide, according to the Post.

    Of the other five recorded breaches, one involved a man who crashed through a perimeter fence gate and drove onto the airfield, causing more than $2,000 in damage; another involved a man who jumped the fence after crashing his car nearby and was later found sitting on an active taxiway around 6:40 a.m.; and a third involved a man who told police he was trying to walk to Texas. Two additional trespassing cases involved people jumping the boundary fence into the airport’s warehouse area. At least two of the eight individuals involved in these incidents had active arrest warrants at the time of their breach, the Post reported, citing probable-cause statements.

    How the Numbers Compare Nationally

    There is no national database that tracks airport perimeter breaches specifically, and airports report trespassing incidents inconsistently, according to Annmarie Heth, an assistant professor of aviation and aerospace sciences at Metropolitan State University of Denver who was interviewed by the Post. The Federal Aviation Administration does separately track runway incursions — a broader category covering air traffic control errors, pilot violations, and unauthorized pedestrians or vehicles on runways and taxiways — at airports with control towers, including DIA. The FAA’s database recorded roughly 5,890 runway incursions nationwide between January 2023 and June 2026, of which 1,022 involved unauthorized pedestrians or vehicles. Only two of the six DIA police-documented perimeter breaches during that period appear in the FAA’s database, which lists a total of 37 incidents involving unauthorized vehicles and pedestrians at DIA dating back to April 2006, per Post reporting.

    Officials Say the Uptick May Reflect Better Detection, Not Worse Security

    Heth told the Post that fatal breaches like the one that killed Mott are extremely rare and that advanced perimeter technology usually allows security personnel to intercept trespassers before an incident escalates. “Fences are there to keep honest people out,” she said. “If somebody is really intent on getting through a fence, they’re going to get through.” She added that improved sensors, cameras, analytics and staff training may explain why more incidents are being detected and reported today compared with when she worked as an airport operations manager in Florida between 2009 and 2015, when even wind gusts could trigger perimeter alarms and prompt an investigation.

    A Denver Police Department spokesman, Doug Schepman, said the department’s dedicated Airport Police Bureau at DIA works closely with airport operations staff, monitors data on breach trends, and adjusts resources accordingly. DIA officials declined to comment on the individual trespassing incidents when contacted by the Post. The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board also declined to comment specifically on DIA’s perimeter breaches.

    Sources

  • GSX 2026 Preview: Security Leaders Head to Atlanta in September

    GSX 2026 Preview: Security Leaders Head to Atlanta in September

    Global Security Exchange returns to Atlanta in September with an agenda built around the operational and management challenges facing security leaders. The ASIS International event combines a technology exhibition with education on physical protection, information security and organizational resilience.

    Event details

    • Dates: 14–16 September 2026
    • Venue: Georgia World Congress Center
    • Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Published themes and technology areas

    • Intelligence and organizational resilience
    • Information security and site security
    • Supply-chain and personnel security
    • Investigations, executive protection and governance

    Who should follow the event

    Security directors, enterprise risk leaders, consultants, integrators and practitioners responsible for protecting people, facilities, information and supply chains.

    Why it matters

    GSX is useful for teams comparing technology with policy and operating practice. Its published education tracks span both physical and information-security responsibilities, making it relevant to organizations managing converged risk.

    Registration and visit planning

    Registration is open through the official GSX website. ASIS also lists pre-conference programs for 12–13 September; visitors should check the current registration and program pages before booking.

    Sources

    Security & Fire Exhibitions